LGF

more options

  

Advertisement

HLF Juror Refusing to Vote

Thu, Oct 4, 2007 at 9:30:21 am PDT

This is not good: Juror refusing to vote in terrorist-financing trial.

Refusing to vote is pretty unusual; all we can do is speculate, but three possibilities occur to me:

1) Fear of retaliation by the terrorist groups whose financiers are on trial.

2) Religious sympathy with the accused.

3) Moonbat moral equivalence.

DALLAS — The Dallas trial of a charity accused of financing Middle Eastern terrorists took a twist Wednesday when jurors indicated that a member of the panel was refusing to vote.

Jurors in the case against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development were called back into the courtroom of U.S. District Judge A. Joe Fish, who told panelists they had a duty to try to reach a decision.

The judge ordered jurors to resume their deliberations, which were in their ninth full day after a two-month trial.

Holy Land and five of its former leaders are accused of illegally aiding the Palestinian militant group Hamas, which the U.S. government designated a terrorist organization in 1995.

Holy Land was the largest U.S. Muslim charity when the government shut it down in December 2001.

None of the jurors spoke during the brief hearing in open court, and the judge did not identify which one was refusing to deliberate.

Advertisement

267 comments

  • Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
  • Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
  • Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
  • Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
  • Disagreement and debate are welcome, but insults and abuse are not, and may cause your account to be blocked.
  • REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.

Hide comments | Jump to bottom

1 lefty201  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:31:50am

No hung trial on this one considering the judge wants a verdict either way...has anyone seen 12 angry men?

2 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:31:55am

Gotcha.

3 Gagdad Bob  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:32:11am

Sounds like jury mullahfication.

4 jcm  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:32:15am

Hopefully the judge will remove the juror, and seat the alternate.

5 Shug  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:32:18am

Contempt of court.

throw him/her in jail.

6 phil flavin  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:32:34am

re: #3 Gagdad Bob
Perfect!

7 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:32:39am

Gordon?

8 forrest  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:32:59am

How about replacing with an alternate?

9 gozips  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:33:00am

Allah got your tongue?

10 littleoldlady  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:33:32am

Don't they have alternates for stuff like this?

And aren't there some repercussions for the juror who refuses to vote?

11 Pawn of the Oppressor  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:33:50am

Wow.

What happens in the case of no vote? Mistrail?

12 NoSubmission  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:34:05am

Refusing to deliberate? That does seem highly unusual.

13 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:34:17am

My first reaction is that it's a moonbat who refuses to participate out of sympathy with the oppressed terrorists.

14 debutaunt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:34:34am

I wish that wasn't so funny. re: #3 Gagdad Bob

15 jcm  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:34:41am

Refusing to deliberate?

Juror misconduct?

16 lefty201  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:02am

think I may walk over there this afternoon and check out how it's going.

17 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:09am

What about the alternate juror?

18 Dianna  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:23am

As I recall my own, brief, experience with jury duty, one does take an oath. You do promise to deliberate.

The juror is facing contempt charges, I believe.

19 phil flavin  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:24am

OT
Jessie McBeth's name discussion now on Rush

20 taxfreekiller[deleted]  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:31am
21 debutaunt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:34am

re: #11 Pawn of the Oppressor
Even worse - it could be a mistrial.

22 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:39am

Lotsa' GMTA today.

23 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:45am

Can they replace him/her with an alternate?

24 vxbush  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:50am

re: #17 MandyManners

I was an alternate juror once. Luckily, no one had to bow out.

25 wildcat84  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:54am

Something tells me that this juror probably has "Muhammed" in his name or wears misogynistic clothing...

26 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:35:57am

re: #3 Gagdad Bob

Sounds like jury mullahfication.

LOL!

27 joan  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:36:09am

#4 jcm "Hopefully the judge will remove the juror, and seat the alternate."
Yes. There shouldn't be any further ado about the matter. Yet, why do I suspect that civil disobedience and sabotage are at work?

28 Spiny Norman  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:36:13am

re: #10 littleoldlady

Don't they have alternates for stuff like this?

And aren't there some repercussions for the juror who refuses to vote?

Not that I'm aware of. If the juror continues to refuse to vote, he/she will be dimissed and an alternate seated. That's one of the reasons they have alternates.

Is lawhawk out there to clarify this?

29 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:36:25am

A conmment on that article speculates that the juror could have been paid off. That's a good possibility as well.

30 loppyd  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:36:32am

I don't know if it is legal to refuse to vote....

Hmm. Not at work so I can't ask my bro.

31 Ward Cleaver  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:37:12am

Charles, seeing how it's here in Dallas, it could be any of the three reasons you stated. Since we hadn't heard a peep about this since jury deliberation began on September 24th, I was beginning to worry that something bad was going to happen.

32 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:37:25am

Where are the legal-eagle Lizards?

33 Pawn of the Oppressor  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:37:26am

Fear of Mohammicide is my guess, though they may well have picked a Muslim juror who's chosen now to play the Islamic Solidarity card.

34 jcm  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:37:45am

re: #29 Killgore Trout

A conmment on that article speculates that the juror could have been paid off. That's a good possibility as well.

Even better, jury tampering. FELONY!

35 Thanos  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:37:48am

It's probably moonbat syndrome coupled with watching 12 Angry Men too many times.

36 taxfreekiller[deleted]  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:37:51am
37 Poitiers-Lepanto  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:38:03am

Talk about useful idiots...

38 mrsoc  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:38:15am

re: #19 phil flavin

OT
Jessie McBeth's name discussion now on Rush

You can't listen to the stream without joining?

40 Spiny Norman  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:38:22am

re: #27 joan

#4 jcm

"Hopefully the judge will remove the juror, and seat the alternate."

Yes. There shouldn't be any further ado about the matter. Yet, why do I suspect that civil disobedience and sabotage are at work?

Because of the nature of the charges?

Oh. You were being rhetorical, weren't you?

41 jcm  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:38:58am

Texas has a oath for jurors, having trouble with the link, don't know if it's my net or theirs.

42 bianchi_roadie  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:39:38am

If it were option 3, I would guess he/she would have voted "not guilty".

If it were option 1, that's pretty darn scary.

43 LC LaWedgie  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:39:42am

re: #31 Ward Cleaver

Didn't they replace one juror a week or two ago?

44 lefty201  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:39:46am

I am asking an attorney at the lawfirm where I work about this now, he should get back to me very quickly.

45 loppyd  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:39:49am

re: #32 MandyManners

Where are the legal-eagle Lizards?


I just sent my brother an email....I would assume this juror would be dismissed and the alternate juror would take his or her place in the voting.

46 debutaunt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:39:58am

re: #41 jcm
The Texas oath has to do with whether or not someone needed killin'.

47 loppyd  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:40:44am

re: #46 debutaunt

re: #41 jcm
The Texas oath has to do with whether or not someone needed killin'.

That is so NOT part of the Massachusetts oath. LOL

48 ShumBaayaMyLord  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:41:05am

Juror's overall life situation should be checked out to ascertain whether CAIR/HLF associates have somehow "communicated" with him/her (e.g., camel head on the bed).

There may be some nasty intimidation going on: witness-silencing attempts may have been fruitless but perhaps someone has "gotten" to this juror.

49 Shug  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:41:10am

re: #38 mrsoc

re: #19 phil flavin


OT
Jessie McBeth's name discussion now on Rush

You can't listen to the stream without joining?

[Link: www.newsradio1290wtks.com...]

50 Roger  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:41:33am

Didn't think this was allowed without repercussions?

Don't they have alternates?

51 lefty201  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:41:35am

From attorney at work

Refuse?

Normally, you either have enough evidence to say "yes" or not enough, which leads to a "No."

Once you're given the standard (preponderance, clear/convincing, or reasonable doubt) then you do have to decide.

52 Iron Fist  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:41:44am

re: #46 debutaunt,

Sounds like in this case someone does.

53 dahozho  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:41:57am

It could be like my SIL, who always says she will try to get out of jury service because, "I don't judge people." Which is actually pretty funny, as she's one of the most negative-judgemental people I know.

But see where this type of crap gets you, when civil values have been replaced by 'tolerance."

54 Just_A_Grunt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:42:06am

Aren't there alternate jurors? Can't they just replace the one with an alternate?

55 toadbelly  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:42:19am

I'm not a lawyer, but I've watched a lot of actors playing lawyers on tv, and I'm guessing that the juror's "inaction" should be enough for the lawyers to call for a mistrial? even if she does end up voting?

56 Ayatollah Ghilmeini  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:42:32am

re: #3 Gagdad Bob

Good pun

The alternate juror is an excellent suggestion.

The juror might have been threatened.

57 commander_vimes  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:42:40am

re: #34 jcm

re: #29 Killgore Trout

A conmment on that article speculates that the juror could have been paid off. That's a good possibility as well.

Even better, jury tampering. FELONY!

One would think that, if this were the case, he/she would simply vote innocent stubbornly.

58 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:42:40am

Did you guys ever stop to think that this one guy might be right?!?

With the tsunami/katrina x100 wave of Islamaphobic backlash flooding this once great country?!?

Could a Black man be fairly judged by 12 white jurors in the Jim Crow South?!?

Could a Jew be fairly judged by 12 Germans in the late 30s?!?

This man might be the last honest man in these once great United States!

59 albusteve  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:43:02am

re: #22 MandyManners

Lotsa' GMTA today.

help me out with GMTA please?...

60 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:43:02am

re: #48 ShumBaayaMyLord

Check out his bank accounts, too.

61 loppyd  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:43:04am

Off to listen to Rush.

Have a good afternoon, Lizards!

62 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:43:10am

re: #30 loppyd


You're not a lawyer?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

63 phil flavin  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:43:36am

re: #58 Ben Hur
Channeling Gordon already?

64 loppyd  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:43:43am

re: #62 Ben Hur

re: #30 loppyd


You're not a lawyer?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

No. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

65 Fjordman  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:44:00am

Fired Professor Teaches Anyway

University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill was fired by the Board of Regents in July. But that didn't stop Churchill from still teaching at CU this week. According to the Boulder Daily Camera, a group of student supporters rented out a classroom at CU's Eaton Humanities Building and invited Churchill to teach. The topic? "ReVisioning American History: Colonization, Genocide and Formation of the U.S. Settler State." And it appears this isn't a one-time-only event. Churchill handed out a class syllabus, which includes scheduled classes to be held Oct. 9 about colonialism, Oct. 23 on genocide and Oct. 30 about racism.

Kosovans short of funds for Bill Clinton statue

A group of Kosovo Albanians appealed Tuesday for donations after they ran out of money to build a statue of former US president Bill Clinton. "With this act we will express sympathy, love and respect to president Clinton," Agim Rexhepi, head of the Friends of America association, told reporters. The three-metre (10-foot) tall monument is still under construction in a studio in the city of Podujevo, 40 kilometres (25 miles) north of the Kosovan capital Pristina. "The main work that remained unfinished is casting the statue in bronze. It can only be done outside of Kosovo," said sculptor Izeir Mustafa.

Religion Must Be Destroyed, Atheists Say

Science must ultimately destroy organized religion, according to some of the leading atheist writers and intellectuals who spoke at a recent atheist conference in Northern Virginia. God is a myth, and children must not be schooled in any faith, they said, at the "Crystal Clear Atheism" event, sponsored by the Atheist Alliance International.

Some of the luminaries who spoke at the conference, held at the Crown Royal Hotel in Crystal City, Va., over the weekend, included Oxford professor Richard Dawkins, author Sam Harris and journalist Christopher Hitchens. The Atheist Alliance International describes itself as "the only democratic national atheist organization in the United States."

While most attendees on Friday night were adamant that God was a myth, the convention, attended by hundreds of people, brought into focus a divide among atheists as to their identity as a movement and the nature of the enemy they faced.

In his speech, Dawkins portrayed a black-and-white intellectual battle between atheism and religion. He denounced the "preposterous nonsense of religious customs" and compared religion to racism. He also gave no quarter to moderate or liberal believers, asserting that "so-called moderate Christianity is simply an evasion."

"If you've been taught to believe it by moderates, what's to stop you from taking the next step and blowing yourself up?" he said.

66 littleoldlady  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:44:33am

re: #51 lefty201

From attorney at work


Refuse?

Normally, you either have enough evidence to say "yes" or not enough, which leads to a "No."

Once you're given the standard (preponderance, clear/convincing, or reasonable doubt) then you do have to decide.

Or what?

67 doppelganglander  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:45:07am

They've already used one alternate, but there should be at least one other available. I was one of two alternates on a federal jury once. Neither of us was needed, but it was a very interesting experience.

68 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:45:45am

re: #57 commander_vimes

Jury struggles in terror-financing trial of Muslim charity

If jurors cannot reach a decision, the judge told them, the case would be tried again, adding to the cost for both the government and defendants.

Maybe the goal is to get a new trial and try again to set a legal precident to allow charities to support Palestinian terrorists.

69 Iron Fist  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:46:31am

re: #65 Fjordman,

They already tried that "Religion must be destroyed" schtick. It was called the Soviet Union. It failed.

70 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:46:48am

re: #64 loppyd

re: #62 Ben Hur


re: #30 loppyd


You're not a lawyer?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


No. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.


OK. You're officially nuts! LOL!

71 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:47:58am

Next up, Athiest terror to end religion.

"Nothing is Greatest".....Boom!

72 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:47:58am

re: #58 Ben Hur

Did you guys ever stop to think that this one guy might be right?!?

With the tsunami/katrina x100 wave of Islamaphobic backlash flooding this once great country?!?

Could a Black man be fairly judged by 12 white jurors in the Jim Crow South?!?

Could a Jew be fairly judged by 12 Germans in the late 30s?!?

This man might be the last honest man in these once great United States!

You spew-inducing man, you!

73 jcm  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:48:19am

This a criminal case, the jury needs to be unanimous. The normal case is a hung jury where unanimity cannot be achieve, and a mistrial is declared.

Not only is the juror refuse to vote, they are refusing to deliberate. If the jurors action in some way affect the other juror a mistrial could be declared.

The juror will undoubtedly be remove, and contempt charges might be applied. By being seated the juror agreed and took an oath. The juror swore to reach a verdict.

Texas jury oath:

Art. 35.22. [622] [698] [679] OATH TO JURY. When the jury
has been selected, the following oath shall be administered them by
the court or under its direction: "You and each of you do solemnly
swear that in the case of the State of Texas against the defendant,
you will a true verdict render according to the law and the
evidence, so help you God".
74 littleoldlady  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:48:19am

re: #68 Killgore Trout

I shudder to think of this trial not ending well. We won't get another chance like this so soon. And if it is at all within the realm of possibility, CAIR will be more insufferable than ever. :-(

75 mbruce  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:48:26am

FWIW I listen to Rush on WLS out of Chicago.
Streamed online.

76 Dr. Shalit  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:48:33am

re: #19 phil flavin

OT
Jessie McBeth's name discussion now on Rush

p-f -

All y'all mean "JESSIE AL ZAID?" That is all.

-S-

77 The Pulchritudinous Patriot  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:48:37am

re: #65 Fjordman


Boy, for a groups that says they don't believe in God, they sure are outspoken about His non-existance.

Me thinks they doth protest too much.

78 The Other Les  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:48:41am

re: #65 Fjordman

There's a reason I don't hang out with those other atheists.

Anyone who believes that being an atheist will make him a superior being will believe anything and will do anything.

/been there, done that

79 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:48:44am

re: #72 MandyManners


Just a glimpse of the world they live in.....

80 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:48:49am

OT:No crackers for Rudy.....

Bishop Would Deny Communion to Giuliani

81 loppyd  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:49:21am

re: #70 Ben Hur

re: #64 loppyd

re: #62 Ben Hur


re: #30 loppyd
You're not a lawyer?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


No. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.


OK. You're officially nuts! LOL!

Oooh, I am official.

I'm a paralegal. Used to think I wanted to be a lawyer, but now
I'm not so sure.

Now I'm really off to listen to Rush.

Later!

82 Just_A_Grunt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:50:01am

I have a question. Why is it in most stories which mention Hamas or Hezbollah they come with the tag line "which the US declared a terrorist organization"? You know like Cindy Sheehan, mother of a soldier killed in Iraq.
Does nobody else think these are terrorist organizations?

83 ctrlL  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:50:04am

re: #3 Gagdad Bob
Excellent!
The juror seems to have decided that 'it' is not going to do the job after being hired. Nothing to do but replace 'it' and have someone else do the job. Judge will probably not be very happy with this and I expect that the juror may be in for contempt of court or some such punishment. Disqualification happens BEFORE you get picked for the jury, not after.

/at least 'it' got paid time off from work

84 Pawn of the Oppressor  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:50:16am

re: #53 dahozho

It could be like my SIL, who always says she will try to get out of jury service because, "I don't judge people." Which is actually pretty funny, as she's one of the most negative-judgemental people I know.

But see where this type of crap gets you, when civil values have been replaced by 'tolerance."

I'm taking this opportunity to restate my opinion that the LGF Theme Song should be a blues number called "Moonbat Sister". Charles could perform, and I'm sure he knows blues musicians who could write something sufficiently funky.

85 Korla Pundit  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:50:24am

Don't they question jurors to find out if they would have a problem convicting or acquitting the case before them? Why did they not raise an objection at that point and avoid being on the jury? If they want to let them off, why not vote "not guilty"? What the heck?!

86 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:50:25am

re: #74 littleoldlady

I gree, these cases are tough enough to get a conviction from. A retrial would be very risky.

87 The Other Les  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:50:42am

re: #71 Ben Hur

Next up, Athiest terror to end religion.

"Nothing is Greatest".....Boom!

A friend of mine in High School (Born Again Christian) used to tell me that an atheist ex-catholic believes that there is no God and that Mary is his mother.

88 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:50:58am
The power of the Israeli lobby is amazing!

This charity was shut down and put on trial after a TV "documentary" by the now-disgraced self-proclaimed terrorism expert and Israel-operative Steven Emerson. Despite the fact that his program "Jihad in America" was found to contain serious flaws including mistranslations, guilt by association, and out-of-context quote, the government shut them down and froze their accounts years BEFORE the trial started.

When Israeli interests are involved, "innocent until proven guilty" becomes an irrelevant inconvenience.

If this juror refused to vote to draw attention to the appalling pretext of this trial, then more power to him/her!

Start the Twilight Zone music.....

89 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:51:03am

re: #59 albusteve

re: #22 MandyManners


Lotsa' GMTA today.

help me out with GMTA please?...

Great Minds Think Alike.

90 lefty201  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:51:24am

re: #66 littleoldlady


I'm assuming that you would be found in contempt of court.

91 Cap'n DOC  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:51:32am

re: #4 jcm

Ditto. That's why they have alternates.

92 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:51:41am

re: #65 Fjordman

re: Ward Churchill teaches anyway

That's hilarious. I wonder who's paying him? Oh, maybe he's going to be like Jesus, you know, wandering the earth, spreading the Word, working miracles.

93 chinesearithmetic  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:51:50am

300 million angry men

94 debutaunt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:52:01am

re: #81 loppyd
A paralegal. Cool - we only partly hate you.

95 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:52:07am

re: #82 Just_A_Grunt

Each European country has their own list. Though most of Europe I think Hamas is included, not sure about Hezbollah.

96 albusteve  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:52:43am

re: #89 MandyManners

re: #59 albusteve


re: #22 MandyManners

Lotsa' GMTA today.

help me out with GMTA please?...

Great Minds Think Alike.

well no wonder then lol!...thank you

97 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:53:09am

And the "we spend $10 billion a month in Iraq but can't do this or that" argument is already really really old.

And nonsensical.

98 Thanos  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:53:25am

Al Qaeda update covering all the recent news

99 NJDhockeyfan  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:53:26am

I do some work and miss nodrog's departure. Are there any trolls left?

100 The Other Les  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:53:42am

re: #92 squarepeg

re: #65 Fjordman

re: Ward Churchill teaches anyway

That's hilarious. I wonder who's paying him? Oh, maybe he's going to be like Jesus, you know, wandering the earth, spreading the Word, working miracles.

Turning wine into urine?

101 Pawn of the Oppressor  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:54:05am

I wonder how they picked the jury. There's the old saw that the lawyers are looking for the dumbest people possible, sure, but in cases intensely scrutinized by the media, isn't it true that sometimes they scour far and wide to find somebody who hasn't heard of the case?

I imagine they used a question like "Do you have an opinion on the Arab/Israeli conflict?" when vetting potential jurors.

102 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:54:27am

re: #79 Ben Hur

re: #72 MandyManners


Just a glimpse of the world they live in.....

It's a funny world!

103 David Simon  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:54:30am

Here we go again; more Hollywood faith-bending:

The latest episode of the CBS crime show "Cold Case" depicted presumably devout Christian teens in an abstinence club as sexually active hypocrites who literally stone a member to keep their sins secret.

[Link: www.worldnetdaily.com...]

104 Spiny Norman  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:54:50am

re: #92 squarepeg

re: #65 Fjordman

re: Ward Churchill teaches anyway

That's hilarious. I wonder who's paying him? Oh, maybe he's going to be like Jesus, you know, wandering the earth, spreading the Word, working miracles.

I'm sure George Soros' lickspittle at Media Matters would welcome his unique insight...

105 Iron Fist  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:55:02am

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan,

All your trolls are belong to us.

106 dahozho  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:55:06am

re: #82 Just_A_Grunt

I have a question. Why is it in most stories which mention Hamas or Hezbollah they come with the tag line "which the US declared a terrorist organization"? You know like Cindy Sheehan, mother of a soldier killed in Iraq.
Does nobody else think these are terrorist organizations?

So-called "moral equivalence" rearing its ugly head.

107 Fjordman  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:55:18am
Anyone who believes that being an atheist will make him a superior being will believe anything and will do anything.

I'm not a religious man, but I don't like that negative attitude towards religion. At least religious people recognize that man is imperfect and plan society accordingly. Many atheists of his kind believe that man is always good and rational. That may sound like a positive view of humanity, but since it is inaccurate, it tends to lead to suffering and Utopian ideals in the end.

108 Timothy S. Carlson  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:55:18am

Seat the alternate - now.

They don't specify how the vote is going - guilty or not guilty. The presumption is that the vote is going guilty and the juror in question is a gutless, spineless dhimmicrat. Throw the little weasel off (which gives the juror the 'out' (s)he is looking for) and seat an alternate.

Mistrial now and we will never hear the end of it from CAIR.

109 Beagle  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:55:43am

Before anything can happen in the case the judge needs to figure out exactly what's going on. Is the juror refusing to vote because they haven't deliberated (timing), or refusing to vote... period? But refusing to participate as a juror is pretty obviously grounds for removing the juror. (Or we'd use more potted plants and save money.)

110 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:56:13am

re: #58 Ben Hur

Ben, I'm afraid this is EXACTLY what we're going to be hearing when this brave, principled soul strolls forth to unburden his perplexed heart to Geraldo, Matt, et al.

15 minutes of fame coming right up.

111 littleoldlady  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:56:42am

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan

I do some work and miss nodrog's departure. Are there any trolls left?

Not to worry. ;-)

112 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:57:13am

re: #101 Pawn of the Oppressor

I wonder how they picked the jury. There's the old saw that the lawyers are looking for the dumbest people possible, sure, but in cases intensely scrutinized by the media, isn't it true that sometimes they scour far and wide to find somebody who hasn't heard of the case?

I imagine they used a question like "Do you have an opinion on the Arab/Israeli conflict?" when vetting potential jurors.

Imagine how Col. North felt knowing that a jury in DC was uninformed enough to never have heard of the Iran-Contra kerfuffle.

113 The Pulchritudinous Patriot  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:57:16am

re: #100 The Other Les

re: #92 squarepeg


re: #65 Fjordman

re: Ward Churchill teaches anyway

That's hilarious. I wonder who's paying him? Oh, maybe he's going to be like Jesus, you know, wandering the earth, spreading the Word, working miracles.


Turning wine into urine?


Ohhhhh! SNAP!

Please post spew alerts! I nearly sprayed my soda all over my monitor.

114 commander_vimes  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:57:44am

re: #105 Iron Fist

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan,

All your trolls are belong to us.

I apologize for the rookie question. But I see variants on this quote all over (not just LGF). what is the original source being parodied?

TIA

115 flighterdoc  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:58:01am

The Texas oath doesn't matter for this trial: It's a Federal court case.

However, I believe that there is a similar charge to the juries in federal court.

116 Shug  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:58:12am

re: #111 littleoldlady

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan


I do some work and miss nodrog's departure. Are there any trolls left?

Not to worry. ;-)


next open registration I'm sure we'll see these the birth of the sock puppet of nogroG

117 Shug  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:58:59am

re: #114 commander_vimes


sorry for the wiki link

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

118 The Pulchritudinous Patriot  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 9:59:43am

re: #111 littleoldlady

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan


I do some work and miss nodrog's departure. Are there any trolls left?

Not to worry. ;-)

LOL! Here's my favorite!

The Whiner - Senseless non-stop fucking whining and complaining like a sour little girl. Have us moan and weep at the most trivial things and irritate the hell out of everyone on the board. Despite this pest of a personality, it can be quite rewarding.

119 bianchi_roadie  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:00:32am

re: #100 The Other Les

More importantly - do the students know they don't get credit for this "class"? I'm sure some will try and claim it as a valid course and demand it be recognized.

120 haakondahl  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:00:33am

Quick, somebody tell senator (or SENATOR, either one) that if it weren't for jurors like this, there would be no verdicts!

121 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:00:33am
122 red satellite  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:00:50am

re: #58 Ben Hur

Did you guys ever stop to think that this one guy might be right?!? blockquote>

Did you ever stop to think that NOT VOTING AT ALL is wrong? Your analogies don't even make sense- a Non vote has nothing to do with a vote of guilty or not guilty.

123 phoenixgirl  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:00:53am

re: #80 Killgore Trout

OT:No crackers for Rudy.....

Bishop Would Deny Communion to Giuliani

Killgore, i love you, i really really really love you.......but......to practicing, devote Catholics........it is the body of Christ. I get that to non Catholics it seems to be crackers but it is not.

124 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:01:05am

re: #114 commander_vimes

re: #105 Iron Fist


re: #99 NJDhockeyfan,

All your trolls are belong to us.


I apologize for the rookie question. But I see variants on this quote all over (not just LGF). what is the original source being parodied?

TIA

ORIGIN: All your base are belong to us

MOVING EVERY ZIG FOR GREAT JUSTICE!

125 Nevergiveup  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:01:08am

re: #103 David Simon

Here we go again; more Hollywood faith-bending:

The latest episode of the CBS crime show "Cold Case" depicted presumably devout Christian teens in an abstinence club as sexually active hypocrites who literally stone a member to keep their sins secret.

[Link: www.worldnetdaily.com...]

Now I am Jewish but I do have alot of Christian friends. I never got the impression that there so to much stoning going on. As for abstinence clubs, well I never got the impression there are alot of them either. Is this a CNN movie?

126 American Soldier  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:01:49am

Sounds like a bad Grisham novel.

Hell. I step away for a while only to come back to a nodrog lieing on the deck with a silicon stake through his empty head. Who's gonna clean up?

127 debutaunt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:02:19am

re: #121 ploome hineni
Those Office Despot new employees can be soooo dumb...

128 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:02:35am
129 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:02:35am

re: #122 red satellite

What are you on about?

130 commander_vimes  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:02:58am

re: #126 American Soldier

Sounds like a bad Grisham novel.

Hell. I step away for a while only to come back to a nodrog lieing on the deck with a silicon stake through his empty head. Who's gonna clean up?

ObCSI Question: was there spatter or spray?

131 NJDhockeyfan  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:02:59am

D.C. fire department can't ban beards, federal judge rules

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has struck down a requirement that firefighters in the District of Columbia be clean-shaven.

A group of firefighters who wear beards for religious reasons first sued in 2001 to challenge the fire department's "grooming policy." That policy was replaced with a safety policy in 2005 that held that beards are not compatible with breathing units because they make it impossible to form a tight seal around the face.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled that the district did not meet its burden of proof under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act to show that being clean-shaven is required to safely wear a self-contained breathing apparatus, or SCBA.

"Moreover, the Department has conceded that, for the vast majority of firefighter activity, a perfect seal between the face mask and the face is not required for safety," Robertson wrote. "The Department fully concedes that bearded firefighters have worn SCBA units for many years without incident."

Alan Etter, a spokesman for D.C. Fire and EMS, said he was not aware of the ruling but said the department would comply. However, he criticized the idea that a bearded firefighter would be safe. He said some of the plaintiffs had already left the department and those who had not were in non-firefighting roles.

"This fire department will never endanger the lives of firefighters, and this is essentially what this is doing," he said.

132 reine.de.tout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:03:08am

re: #59 albusteve

re: #22 MandyManners


Lotsa' GMTA today.

help me out with GMTA please?...


Great Minds Think Alike.

133 The Other Les  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:03:19am

re: #121 ploome hineni

another day, another wacko

oh...went to Office Depot this morning to look for some inkfor my fountain pen....the clerk did not know if ink came in a bottle

/

I suggest going to an art supply store. They sell, or used to sell, water based ink for calligraphy pens.

134 albusteve  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:04:04am

re: #132 reine.de.tout

re: #59 albusteve


re: #22 MandyManners

Lotsa' GMTA today.

help me out with GMTA please?...

Great Minds Think Alike.

got it...thanks

135 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:04:16am

re: #123 phoenixgirl

I'm ex Catholic so I grok the whole communion thing. They won't give me crackers anymore either.

136 Kenneth  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:04:19am

re: #107 Fjordman

Absolutely.

Without God, anything is permissible.

137 ploome hineni[deleted]  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:04:20am
138 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:04:24am

If it is juror misconduct (and it quacks to high heaven like it to me), then PROSECUTE this idiot to the fullest extent of the law!

1) Mush-headedness is not an excuse
2) No lying to an American court and getting away with it -- this is corrupting the justice system

139 goodbye_natalie  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:05:53am

Another reason professional jury pools are a necessity.

Anybody that's been to the mall, a state fair, the emergency room, or any federal or state government agency can attest the chances of choosing 12 individuals with all the necessary faculties concerning anything but their next fix or what they are going to eat next is slim and none.

140 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:06:12am

The oath is a living, breathing oath.

141 The Pulchritudinous Patriot  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:06:15am

re: #133 The Other Les

re: #121 ploome hineni


another day, another wacko

oh...went to Office Depot this morning to look for some inkfor my fountain pen....the clerk did not know if ink came in a bottle

/


I suggest going to an art supply store. They sell, or used to sell, water based ink for calligraphy pens.

I write with a quill (yes, I know I've been reading too much Austen!) and I get my India ink from Hobby Lobby.

142 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:06:23am

re: #122 red satellite

red sat,

you misunderestimate Ben Hur's sense of humor

also his prescience; look for these words to be spoken by liberal commentators any minute now

143 phoenixgirl  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:06:30am

re: #135 Killgore Trout

re: #123 phoenixgirl

I'm ex Catholic so I grok the whole communion thing. They won't give me crackers anymore either.

:(

144 Beagle  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:06:54am

Eh, it pretty much has to be a bad juror at this point. They're nine days in.

Did you read the first comment on the article?

It was the JOOOOOOOS!

The power of the Israeli lobby is amazing!

This charity was shut down and put on trial after a TV "documentary" by the now-disgraced self-proclaimed terrorism expert and Israel-operative Steven Emerson. Despite the fact that his program "Jihad in America" was found to contain serious flaws including mistranslations, guilt by association, and out-of-context quote, the government shut them down and froze their accounts years BEFORE the trial started.

When Israeli interests are involved, "innocent until proven guilty" becomes an irrelevant inconvenience.

If this juror refused to vote to draw attention to the appalling pretext of this trial, then more power to him/her!

If you want to know where "newsbuff" is coming from, click his nick.

It would have been nice if the Chronicle had mentioned that DeBakey is a first generation Arab American of Syrian decent.

There are numerous such world-class physicians, engineers, scientists, inventors, and lawyers who have made their mark on America. It seems that the ethnicity and religion of Arabs and Muslims only shows up when the person is a terrorist.


Of course in actual fact Muslims and Arabs get special treatment in places like Dearborn, news blackout and government coverup, so we don't worry our pretty little heads about camouflaged jihadis with rifles.

145 Iron Fist  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:06:59am

re: #114 commander_vimes,

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US.

It's an old (in internet time :-) joke.

146 easy  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:07:02am

re: #124 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

re: #114 commander_vimes


re: #105 Iron Fist

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan,
All your trolls are belong to us.

I apologize for the rookie question. But I see variants on this quote all over (not just LGF). what is the original source being parodied?
TIA

ORIGIN: All your base are belong to us

MOVING EVERY ZIG FOR GREAT JUSTICE!

The origins on LGF

147 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:07:04am

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan

I do some work and miss nodrog's departure. Are there any trolls left?

Yes. Check out the Lounge when VictorK's there. Learn why he gets the nickname "VictorKos".

148 Nevergiveup  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:07:15am

re: #131 NJDhockeyfan

D.C. fire department can't ban beards, federal judge rules

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has struck down a requirement that firefighters in the District of Columbia be clean-shaven.

A group of firefighters who wear beards for religious reasons first sued in 2001 to challenge the fire department's "grooming policy." That policy was replaced with a safety policy in 2005 that held that beards are not compatible with breathing units because they make it impossible to form a tight seal around the face.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled that the district did not meet its burden of proof under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act to show that being clean-shaven is required to safely wear a self-contained breathing apparatus, or SCBA.

"Moreover, the Department has conceded that, for the vast majority of firefighter activity, a perfect seal between the face mask and the face is not required for safety," Robertson wrote. "The Department fully concedes that bearded firefighters have worn SCBA units for many years without incident."

Alan Etter, a spokesman for D.C. Fire and EMS, said he was not aware of the ruling but said the department would comply. However, he criticized the idea that a bearded firefighter would be safe. He said some of the plaintiffs had already left the department and those who had not were in non-firefighting roles.

"This fire department will never endanger the lives of firefighters, and this is essentially what this is doing," he said.

He is a Clinton appointed judge, and he did make a anti-Guantanamo ruling. He appears to be otherwise qualified.

149 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:07:29am

re: #122 red satellite

re: #58 Ben Hur


Did you guys ever stop to think that this one guy might be right?!? blockquote>

Did you ever stop to think that NOT VOTING AT ALL is wrong? Your analogies don't even make sense- a Non vote has nothing to do with a vote of guilty or not guilty.

Anyone want to answer for me?

150 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:08:11am

re: #142 squarepeg

Thank you, Comrade.

151 The Pulchritudinous Patriot  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:08:26am

re: #143 phoenixgirl

re: #135 Killgore Trout


re: #123 phoenixgirl

I'm ex Catholic so I grok the whole communion thing. They won't give me crackers anymore either.


:(


Well I'm a almost formerly lapsed Catholic (have begun attending Mass again... well sometimes) and I find Communion to be very satisfying, IMO. I always feel full and content afterwards.

152 Kreuzueber Halbmond  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:08:30am

What's wrong with the damn judge? Throw the idiot out and seat an alternate already.

153 Shug  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:09:03am

re: #139 goodbye_natalie

Another reason professional jury pools are a necessity.

Anybody that's been to the mall, a state fair, the emergency room, or any federal or state government agency can attest the chances of choosing 12 individuals with all the necessary faculties concerning anything but their next fix or what they are going to eat next is slim and none.

statistically speaking, half of americans are below average.

somehow, I think the average jury pool is in the bottom 30% of the IQ curve

154 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:09:17am

re: #121 ploome hineni

oh...went to Office Depot this morning to look for some inkfor my fountain pen....the clerk did not know if ink came in a bottle

haha! And Ma'am, how do you think a printer cartridge would fit into a pen, anyway?

by the way, did you want cyan, magenta, or yellow ink?

is that a laser pen or an inkjet pen?

155 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:09:57am
somehow, I think the average jury pool is in the bottom 30% of the IQ curve

That's because we spend $10 Billion a month in Iraq.

156 red satellite  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:10:10am

If the attempt was sarcasm or irony...I didn't see any / tag.

157 The Pulchritudinous Patriot  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:10:30am

re: #155 Ben Hur

somehow, I think the average jury pool is in the bottom 30% of the IQ curve

That's because we spend $10 Billion a month in Iraq.


WooHoo Ben! You have those chariot wheels really turning today!

158 lawhawk  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:10:33am

Florida Jury Instructions

OT:
AQ in Iraq financier caught.

Iraqi and US forces have detained a man they believe received 100 million dollars this summer from Al-Qaeda sympathisers to hand out for "terrorist" operations in Iraq, the US military said Thursday.

"The 100 million was what our intelligence reports indicate he has received spanning several months this year," US military spokesman Sam Hymas told AFP. "That is all the unclassified information I can give you."

A statement from the military said the man, who was detained in the central Baghdad neighbourhood of Al-Kindi, was suspected of handing over 50,000 dollars a month to Al-Qaeda using his leather merchant business as a front.

$100 million and $50,000 a month. We're talking serious money here, and enough to bankroll an ongoing terrorist operation. However, one has to wonder whether he was pocketing some of that money if he was only managing to dole out $50,000 a month. Where was the rest of the money going?

159 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:10:43am

re: #156 red satellite

I dont /

160 albusteve  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:10:44am

re: #156 red satellite

If the attempt was sarcasm or irony...I didn't see any / tag.

some posters dont need tags

161 friarstale  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:10:51am

I agree with seafood gumbo, #39

bribed a million in petro-dollars
the juror should be investigated for any sudden increase in lavish spending

so add bribery to the list of possibilities

1) Fear of retaliation by the terrorist groups whose financiers are on trial.

2) Religious sympathy with the accused.

3) Moonbat moral equivalence.

162 Honorary Yooper  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:11:18am

re: #131 NJDhockeyfan

D.C. fire department can't ban beards, federal judge rules


WASHINGTON — A federal judge has struck down a requirement that firefighters in the District of Columbia be clean-shaven.

A group of firefighters who wear beards for religious reasons first sued in 2001 to challenge the fire department's "grooming policy." That policy was replaced with a safety policy in 2005 that held that beards are not compatible with breathing units because they make it impossible to form a tight seal around the face.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled that the district did not meet its burden of proof under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act to show that being clean-shaven is required to safely wear a self-contained breathing apparatus, or SCBA.

"Moreover, the Department has conceded that, for the vast majority of firefighter activity, a perfect seal between the face mask and the face is not required for safety," Robertson wrote. "The Department fully concedes that bearded firefighters have worn SCBA units for many years without incident."

Alan Etter, a spokesman for D.C. Fire and EMS, said he was not aware of the ruling but said the department would comply. However, he criticized the idea that a bearded firefighter would be safe. He said some of the plaintiffs had already left the department and those who had not were in non-firefighting roles.

"This fire department will never endanger the lives of firefighters, and this is essentially what this is doing," he said.

WTF!?! You need a good seal to wear a respirator, much less a SCBA! Religious laws be damned on this one. Who does this US District judge think he is? Obviously, he's never had to be fit-tested for a SCBA.

163 Cap'n DOC  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:11:34am

re: #44 lefty201

Usually more than one alternate.

164 lawhawk  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:12:23am

re: #131 NJDhockeyfan

I recall during the first Gulf War that rabbis had to issue a ruling in Israel over whether it was appropriate for Orthodox men to shave to wear gas masks so that they fit properly and protect against the WMD that Saddam might launch in Israel's direction.

They found that there was no problem shaving under the circumstances.

165 Shug  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:12:29am

re: #146 easy


I like this one too

All your fakes are belong to us

166 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:12:47am

Boy loves camel.....
THE CUTEST KID
Awwwwww.

167 Roger  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:13:49am

re: #123 phoenixgirl

Did you really have to?

168 anotherindyfilmguy  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:14:10am

The juror could be moonbattilly or sympathetically trying to "stick it to the man"... Could also still be in negotiations on selling said vote as well... or that person could just be obstinate and on a personal power trip trying to push the limits and feel "extra special/powerful" to make up for their disappointment's about the felt non importance of their life enjoyed outside of the spotlight etc...
moron...

169 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:14:46am

re: #139 goodbye_natalie

Another reason professional jury pools are a necessity.

Can we amend that to "another reason why education reform is a necessity"?

It's my big cause right now. We're getting so stupid we can't support our own institutions.

170 The Other Les  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:14:48am

re: #162 Honorary Yooper

WTF!?! You need a good seal to wear a respirator, much less a SCBA! Religious laws be damned on this one. Who does this US District judge think he is? Obviously, he's never had to be fit-tested for a SCBA.


I guess some some are going to have to learn the hard way.

171 Nevergiveup  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:15:25am

re: #164 lawhawk

re: #131 NJDhockeyfan

I recall during the first Gulf War that rabbis had to issue a ruling in Israel over whether it was appropriate for Orthodox men to shave to wear gas masks so that they fit properly and protect against the WMD that Saddam might launch in Israel's direction.

They found that there was no problem shaving under the circumstances.

I believe in general Judaism will allow you at least side step most religious laws if the intent is to save lives.

172 toeknee33  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:16:08am

Attorneys here at work say a Hung Jury would be called and the juror could face contempt charges for breaking they oath they swore by. They would have to retry the case.

173 Dianna  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:16:09am

re: #77 The Pulchritudinous Patriot

Atheism is also a faith, involving a leap of faith.

174 NoSubmission  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:16:51am

I would imagine that jurors in a high-profile federal trial who refuse to participate will be dealt with swiftly.

175 The Pulchritudinous Patriot  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:16:53am

re: #173 Dianna

re: #77 The Pulchritudinous Patriot

Atheism is also a faith, involving a leap of faith.

Or a leap away from faith?

176 lawhawk  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:18:40am
177 anotherindyfilmguy  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:18:41am

re: #162 Honorary Yooper

re: #131 NJDhockeyfan

D.C. fire department can't ban beards, federal judge rules


WASHINGTON — A federal judge has struck down a requirement that firefighters in the District of Columbia be clean-shaven.A group of firefighters who wear beards for religious reasons first sued in 2001 to challenge the fire department's "grooming policy." That policy was replaced with a safety policy in 2005 that held that beards are not compatible with breathing units because they make it impossible to form a tight seal around the face.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled that the district did not meet its burden of proof under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act to show that being clean-shaven is required to safely wear a self-contained breathing apparatus, or SCBA.

"Moreover, the Department has conceded that, for the vast majority of firefighter activity, a perfect seal between the face mask and the face is not required for safety," Robertson wrote. "The Department fully concedes that bearded firefighters have worn SCBA units for many years without incident."

Alan Etter, a spokesman for D.C. Fire and EMS, said he was not aware of the ruling but said the department would comply. However, he criticized the idea that a bearded firefighter would be safe. He said some of the plaintiffs had already left the department and those who had not were in non-firefighting roles.

"This fire department will never endanger the lives of firefighters, and this is essentially what this is doing," he said.

WTF!?! You need a good seal to wear a respirator, much less a SCBA! Religious laws be damned on this one. Who does this US District judge think he is? Obviously, he's never had to be fit-tested for a SCBA.

The Sikhs won a similar ruling against the U.S. military a long time ago, the military argued it was needed for them to be clean shaven to get a good seal on chemical protective masks. The Sikhs came out in court and proved that with essentially a hair gel obtain the needed seal on their equipment and the military was forced by the courts to make a special rule regarding their wearing of beards for religious purposes...

178 Iron Fist  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:18:42am

re: #175 The Pulchritudinous Patriot,

Stating that there is no G-d is an act of faith. It is not subject to proof (you can't prove a negative).

179 littleoldlady  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:18:49am

re: #172 toeknee33

Attorneys here at work say a Hung Jury would be called and the juror could face contempt charges for breaking they oath they swore by. They would have to retry the case.

OY. :-(

180 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:19:15am

I mean, would you give THIS MAN a traffic ticket for j-walking?!?

182 zygazint  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:20:00am

re: #159 Ben Hur

re: #156 red satellite

I dont /

All your / are belong to us.

183 txlady  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:20:05am

hmmmm. I have not read all the posts. I'm at work. Just thought to chime in.
I wonder if it's the silencing of America at work?
Thats just another spin on it potentially.
What if the juror is plain scared?
The courts have released the brotherhood members. link below.
[Link: www.jpost.com...]

Maybe he's being bought off by the ones that have tried to silence Imus or Savage?

184 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:20:11am

re: #174 NoSubmission

I would imagine that jurors in a high-profile federal trial who refuse to participate will be dealt with swiftly.

And HARSHLY, I hope.

Refusing to participate, wtf? That amounts to a f***ing LIE to the court! I so hate this shit of people undermining the American justice system with their Insignificant Joeblow Syndrome issues.

185 GGMac  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:22:20am

OT OT EXTRA! EXTRA!

Rush just referenced JammieWearingFool's blog!

186 commander_vimes  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:22:42am

re: #160 albusteve

re: #156 red satellite

If the attempt was sarcasm or irony...I didn't see any / tag.

some posters dont need tags

Neither do some readers.

187 RememberSekhmet?  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:22:48am

This is interesting. Very interesting. In a bad sense.

188 Ben Hur  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:23:02am

re: #185 GGMac

Cool

189 CyanSnowHawk  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:23:14am

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan

Ben Hur stepped up, but so far is making a rather half-hearted attempt.

190 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:23:18am

re: #168 anotherindyfilmguy

I think you're nailing a BIG possibility. That's why--if it turns out to be as you said--we'll hear plenty from this blithering fool on the Talking Head shows.

"Geraldo, I had to do what my conscience told me to do. I know I took the oath, but my gut tells me that there are times when . . ." (groan)

191 Dianna  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:23:34am

re: #175 The Pulchritudinous Patriot

No, because you must have utter confidence in your position. Whether they'll ever admit it or not, Atheism is a religion.

192 oriana fan  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:23:53am

Texas law would not apply as this case is in US District Court.

If there are no alternates, the judge could allow the parties to agree that the remaining 11 jurors could deliberate, otherwise it would likely wind up with a mistrial. If the juror is held in contempt, whatever vote they make to gain their release will be challenged.

If there is a conviction, expect a motion for a mistrial (which will be denied) and then a motion for new trial along with an appeal based upon juror misconduct and/or improper judicial influence on a juror.

This is a very bad development and one reason why the juror system is flawed.

Oriana Fan.

193 MandyManners  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:24:29am

re: #185 GGMac

OT OT EXTRA! EXTRA!

Rush just referenced JammieWearingFool's blog!

WooHoooooooooooooo!

194 jcm  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:26:43am

re: #162 Honorary Yooper

re: #131 NJDhockeyfan

D.C. fire department can't ban beards, federal judge rules


WASHINGTON — A federal judge has struck down a requirement that firefighters in the District of Columbia be clean-shaven.A group of firefighters who wear beards for religious reasons first sued in 2001 to challenge the fire department's "grooming policy." That policy was replaced with a safety policy in 2005 that held that beards are not compatible with breathing units because they make it impossible to form a tight seal around the face.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled that the district did not meet its burden of proof under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act to show that being clean-shaven is required to safely wear a self-contained breathing apparatus, or SCBA.

"Moreover, the Department has conceded that, for the vast majority of firefighter activity, a perfect seal between the face mask and the face is not required for safety," Robertson wrote. "The Department fully concedes that bearded firefighters have worn SCBA units for many years without incident."

Alan Etter, a spokesman for D.C. Fire and EMS, said he was not aware of the ruling but said the department would comply. However, he criticized the idea that a bearded firefighter would be safe. He said some of the plaintiffs had already left the department and those who had not were in non-firefighting roles.

"This fire department will never endanger the lives of firefighters, and this is essentially what this is doing," he said.

WTF!?! You need a good seal to wear a respirator, much less a SCBA! Religious laws be damned on this one. Who does this US District judge think he is? Obviously, he's never had to be fit-tested for a SCBA.

I had the positive pressure fail in the middle of a fire, still had air but without the seal I would have been sucking smoke. But then again when I started SCBA were for HAZMAT, house fires we just sucked smoke and hawked black loogies for a couple days afterwards.

195 goodbye_natalie  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:26:54am

Let's face some hard facts. To pull 12 capable jurors with no personal bias, no knowledge of the facts, and no pent up rage at the American legal system is near impossible.

For example. Let's take this case. Stastically speaking, the chances are quite high that there are 4-5 Gordoniks, Chenzens, a Sphinx, with an American hating Sura 109 thrown in just waiting for the $20 bucks a day earned wage.

196 The Pulchritudinous Patriot  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:26:57am

re: #191 Dianna

re: #175 The Pulchritudinous Patriot

No, because you must have utter confidence in your position. Whether they'll ever admit it or not, Atheism is a religion.


Ahhhhh. I see.

This gives me something to ponder over with a cigar.

197 nyc redneck  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:27:56am

i'd like to know if this juror is just a crack pot or a moslem or a moonbat. i don't like to think abt. the future difficulty of getting convictions on terrorists because of too many sympathizers in our country.

198 littleoldlady  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:28:02am

re: #195 goodbye_natalie

Aha! Perspective! ;-)

199 budvarakbar  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:28:12am

re: #1 lefty201

No hung trial on this one considering the judge wants a verdict either way...has anyone seen 12 angry men?

No way has a jury 12 MEN -- has not been allowed for many years now - I know - I have been on several juries over the last 30 years -- and I have seen several instances of this type of whine-out BS

200 budvarakbar  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:29:44am

re: #13 Killgore Trout

My first reaction is that it's a moonbat who refuses to participate out of sympathy with the oppressed terrorists.

You are probably dead on here

201 phoenixgirl  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:29:45am

re: #167 Roger

re: #123 phoenixgirl

Did you really have to?

did i want to? no. did i have to? yes

202 Dianna  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:30:24am

re: #196 The Pulchritudinous Patriot

Enjoy!

My ex was an atheist, and he reacted rather badly to my telling him he was more religious than I.

203 Catttt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:30:49am

re: #199 budvarakbar

re: #1 lefty201


No hung trial on this one considering the judge wants a verdict either way...has anyone seen 12 angry men?

No way has a jury 12 MEN -- has not been allowed for many years now - I know - I have been on several juries over the last 30 years -- and I have seen several instances of this type of whine-out BS

Surely you realize that Twelve Angry Men is a play/movie?

204 rw in san diego  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:30:54am

re: #80 Killgore Trout

I wonder if he would have denied communion to all those child molesters in his ranks?

205 Roger  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:31:04am

re: #197 nyc redneck

That's why there shouldn't be trials without a military tribunal for all cases dealing with the enemies of the USA.

206 Ziggy  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:31:34am

If the mystery juror refuses to vote, can't they be held in contempt? Any lawyers out there? Once that person becomes known to the public, I suspect they'll wish the voted.

207 beblebrox  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:31:43am

re: #175 The Pulchritudinous Patriot

re: #173 Dianna

re: #77 The Pulchritudinous Patriot

Atheism is also a faith, involving a leap of faith.

Or a leap away from faith?

Man, i feeling like such a contrarian today. Normally I find myself right in line with most here.

I'd amend that to say Militant Atheism is a faith, not so much for your average non-believing person. For me, whether it is religion, or any thing else for that matter, I Believe in nothing. I Accept that for which i have demonstrable empirical proof of. I generally approach most matters in the same way. Just because some says it doesn't make it so. Just because 100 say it adds no more weight for me. I have to see it and prove to myself. Call it the Missouri Approach. ;)

208 budvarakbar  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:31:45am

re: #20 taxfreekiller

Do not forget Teddy K and O.J.

209 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:32:01am

re: #195 goodbye_natalie

To pull 12 capable jurors with no personal bias, no knowledge of the facts, and no pent up rage at the American legal system is near impossible.

I agree--but crazily enough I think education reform rather than legal reform is the fix for this. We don't teach kids to separate bias from facts, seek knowledge, and take a rational view of American institutions nowadays (gross generalization that would probably hold up). If we did, we'd have a better justice system with fairer juries.

If I ever had to go on trial for anything, I swear, I might very well opt for a judge over a jury. I don't know what people are like in my town.

210 jamgarr  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:32:03am

Haven't had a chance to read all the thread so I don't know if this has been mentioned.

In the jurisdictions that I try civil cases in the alternates are excused prior to the jury receiving the instructions.

211 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:33:18am

re: #204 rw in san diego

re: #80 Killgore Trout

I wonder if he would have denied communion to all those child molesters in his ranks?

Thank you!

/another chagrinned ex-Catholic

212 American Soldier  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:33:52am

re: #162 Honorary Yooper

WTF!?! You need a good seal to wear a respirator, much less a SCBA! Religious laws be damned on this one. Who does this US District judge think he is? Obviously, he's never had to be fit-tested for a SCBA.

In 1976, before the advent of positive pressure airpacks, I had this discussion with an MGFD (maybe Skokie, it was a while back) CPT. At the time I had a full beard halfway to my pupick and hair past my shoulders. I took a Scott mask, crimped the hose, and inhaled. The mask remained on my face, without headstraps. The CPT said, "I see it, but I choose to not believe it". That statement resonates frequently when I deal with my chain of command.
(former CFD)

213 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:34:17am

re: #210 jamgarr

This jurisdiction is federal. We're trying to figure out what the rules are.

214 goodbye_natalie  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:34:39am

Bet you money this is a celebrity moonbat in waiting with dreams of sugar plum Geraldos dancing in their heads. They think this will make them famous, rich or some other sentiment.

If they were to take this person out and cane them for public spectacle, these shenanigans would stop.

215 Catttt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:34:53am

re: #206 Ziggy

If the mystery juror refuses to vote, can't they be held in contempt? Any lawyers out there? Once that person becomes known to the public, I suspect they'll wish the voted.

I'd think it would be a problem for the juror - you swear before you are seated that you will carry out the office of juror, so he/she is in essence forswearing him/herself.

216 squarepeg  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:35:27am

Well, looks like I'm talkin' to myself now. The Technical Open holds no charms for me, so I'll be gettin' to the housework.

217 American Soldier  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:35:34am

re: #164 lawhawk

re: #131 NJDhockeyfan

I recall during the first Gulf War that rabbis had to issue a ruling in Israel over whether it was appropriate for Orthodox men to shave to wear gas masks so that they fit properly and protect against the WMD that Saddam might launch in Israel's direction.

They found that there was no problem shaving under the circumstances.

My above statement notwithstanding, an NBC battlefield environment is a whole different ballgame from Fire Service.

218 cosmo  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:37:37am

Call in the alternate. Now.

219 reloadingisnotahobby  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:38:13am

re: #32 MandyManners

Where are the legal-eagle Lizards?


I'm here!
Oh, You said "LEGAL " eagle Lizards!
Sorry ! Carry on!

220 nyc redneck  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:39:03am

re: #205 Roger

re: #197 nyc redneck

That's why there shouldn't be trials without a military tribunal for all cases dealing with the enemies of the USA.

yes, it's infuriating that some terrorist sympathizer could be a in position to jack up the system on such a such a serious case.

221 CyanSnowHawk  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:39:16am

re: #191 Dianna

re: #175 The Pulchritudinous Patriot

No, because you must have utter confidence in your position. Whether they'll ever admit it or not, Atheism is a religion.

At the risk of antagonizing the Goddess of the Hunt.

Actually, I do not believe there is a god.
I do not actively believe that there is no god.

According to Hyperdictionary.com

Atheism
Definition:

1. [n] a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods
2. [n] the doctrine or belief that there is no God

I choose definition #1, so I don't call my atheism a religion.
I suppose that those that choose definition #2 might call their belief a religion.

Usually I find that those claiming Atheism to be a religion are trying to do so to further some other argument. It seems to be mentioned a lot when discussing issues surrounding the separation of church and state.

222 infidel4ever  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:39:17am

re: #124 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

re: #114 commander_vimes


re: #105 Iron Fist

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan,
All your trolls are belong to us.

I apologize for the rookie question. But I see variants on this quote all over (not just LGF). what is the original source being parodied?
TIA

ORIGIN: All your base are belong to us

MOVING EVERY ZIG FOR GREAT JUSTICE!

Thanks, I never knew that!

And on Youtube:

223 Dianna  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:39:42am

re: #207 beblebrox

That sounds more like agnostic than atheist.

I could no more declare that there is no god than I could formulate a unified field theory.

224 goodbye_natalie  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:41:56am

re: #209 squarepeg

If I ever had to go on trial for anything, I swear, I might very well opt for a judge over a jury. I don't know what people are like in my town.

Oh, I agree with you. I'll take my chances with some ultra lib judge before I throw myself at the mercy of a court. Scary what is out in the general public.

Concerning education reform, while I admire your wishes, I think you will find yourself beating your head against a brick wall. Forgetting all the rotten administrators, PC idiots, inadequate teachers, and all other ills, the bottom line is this:

Until we produce a higher quality parent, nothing will change. And I don't know how you make parents responsible moral and love their children. When approximately 40% of children are now born into single parent homes, you have your work cut out for you.

225 brakes  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:42:19am

re: #215 Catttt

I'd think it would be a problem for the juror - you swear before you are seated that you will carry out the office of juror, so he/she is in essence forswearing him/herself.

That's what I thought when I saw this thread. When I was on a jury we took an oath to fulfill our duty without prejudice and to the best of our abilities. If my time was being wasted by this idiot I would be sooo angry.

226 D'kian_  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:43:23am

Could be just another liberal who doesn't want to be, you know, judgemental.

227 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:44:12am

re: #221 CyanSnowHawk

Usually I find that those claiming Atheism to be a religion are trying to do so to further some other argument.

It's a logical fallacy that I don't debate anymore, it's too easily debunked. "Atheism requires faith" is usually accompanied by "Evolution is a religion". I see it as an attempt to blur the lines between faith and reason.

228 reloadingisnotahobby  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:44:41am

re: #225 brakes
I don't even know the juror...And I have contempt for
Him/Her..!

229 kmclay  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:45:00am

re: #177 anotherindyfilmguy


WTF!?! You need a good seal to wear a respirator, much less a SCBA! Religious laws be damned on this one. Who does this US District judge think he is? Obviously, he's never had to be fit-tested for a SCBA.

The Sikhs won a similar ruling against the U.S. military a long time ago, the military argued it was needed for them to be clean shaven to get a good seal on chemical protective masks. The Sikhs came out in court and proved that with essentially a hair gel obtain the needed seal on their equipment and the military was forced by the courts to make a special rule regarding their wearing of beards for religious purposes...

Huh. I wonder if the Iranians tried that? The Iranians suffered high casualties when exposed to mustard gas during the Iran - Iraq War because their beards interfered with their gas masks.

230 budvarakbar[deleted]  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:45:33am
231 Dianna  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:46:32am

re: #221 CyanSnowHawk

Oh, dear.

I have no agenda, I'm not trying to prove anything.

Definition one is acceptable, but in terms of a personal belief, it's not atheism. It may be a practicable way to live, if one has no particular persuasion one way or another; it's also fine if you're not seeking transcendant explanations. But it's not atheism, because that is the declaration that god does not exist. And that is an enormous leap of faith.

In the end, that's an opinion I have come to, based on observation. A somewhat wry observation, at that.

232 Catttt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:47:58am

re: #218 cosmo

Call in the alternate. Now.

Based on my experience, the alternates are dismissed before deliberation begins.

233 RememberSekhmet?  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:48:08am

re: #118 The Pulchritudinous Patriot

re: #111 littleoldlady

re: #99 NJDhockeyfan


I do some work and miss nodrog's departure. Are there any trolls left?


Not to worry. ;-)

LOL! Here's my favorite!

The Whiner - Senseless non-stop fucking whining and complaining like a sour little girl. Have us moan and weep at the most trivial things and irritate the hell out of everyone on the board. Despite this pest of a personality, it can be quite rewarding.

Ah, I think you found a MediaMatters and MoveOn affiliate.

234 Dianna  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:48:16am

re: #227 Killgore Trout

Well, evolution isn't a religion.

Again, I emphasize, I have no agenda.

235 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:52:12am

re: #234 Dianna

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. Just recounting my experiences with that line of debate.

236 Charles  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:53:45am

budvarakbar: this is a warning. I deleted your comment because it contained a racial slur. If it happens again your account will be blocked.

237 Catttt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:53:51am

How the dickens do you guys always get onto religious debates. Killgore - what did you do! ? ! now?

/;)

238 realwest  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:54:46am

Well, I'm a retired lawyer and, although I never tried a case, I've had partners who were litigators. I e-mailed two of them (now each in a different firm) and their response was WHAT? A jury can be in a situation where they are unable to reach a unanimous vote.
A jury can be in a position where one or more jurors fails to discuss the trial at all. Or.......that's it. Never heard of a juror refusing to render a verdict after 9 days of deliberation.
They both seemed to feel that the judge is either going to: seat an alternate juror (choice number 1) or declare a mistrial (choice number 2), then demand that the juror in question be held in contempt and strongly advise the US Attorney to investigate jury tampering and to investigage the advisability of prosecuting this one juror.
Both of them, however, seemed to feel that the judge will declare a mistrial - which each of them and I feel would be a miscarriage of justice.
BTW, alternate jurors are USUALLY only used, once a jury goes into deliberations, if a juror is, for some reason, physically unable to continue.
As to jury trials in general, I'll quote Mark Twain:
"The only problem with jury trials is that you must find 12 men who do not read newspapers, never talk to their neighbors or anyone else and are basically out of touch with the rest of the community."
I personally believe that the judge will declare a mistrial here, probably hold the one juror in contempt and, although he need not, probably ask the US Attorney to investigate jury tampering. I think if a mistrial is declared, the US Attorney will investigate jury tampering and the entire background of this particular juror.

239 Beagle  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:55:52am

re: #172 toeknee33

Attorneys here at work say a Hung Jury would be called and the juror could face contempt charges for breaking they oath they swore by. They would have to retry the case.


That's possible, or dismissal of the juror (defense grounds for appeal if convicted).

Judges have to be careful about forcing a verdict, forcing a vote, or forcing an opinion about the case. But if a juror suddenly becomes a mineral it is possible to replace that juror even after the start of deliberations. I'm still nosing around federal cases and stuff on the Internet.

There's a lot we don't know about what's going on. But a juror shouldn't "refuse to vote," and "refuse to deliberate," period. That's pretty much the entire job description for juror.

240 Killgore Trout  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 10:59:24am

re: #238 realwest

I'm starting to think the jury tampering theory is starting to look more likely.

241 goodbye_natalie  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:02:51am

re: #111 littleoldlady

LOL! Who knew Gordonik was making a little moolah while making an ass of himself!

242 moonstone  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:04:23am

re: #207 beblebrox
Not trying to tell you your business, but according to the accepted definitions, I think that makes you an agnostic, not an atheist.

243 RickZ  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:11:12am

re: #210 jamgarr

Haven't had a chance to read all the thread so I don't know if this has been mentioned.

In the jurisdictions that I try civil cases in the alternates are excused prior to the jury receiving the instructions.

I was once a juror on an attempted murder trial in Queens many years ago. The 2 alternates had to sit outside the jury deliberation room (with the the court officers) while we came to a decision. The alternates were in the court (in their alternate chairs) when the verdict was read.

It seems to me pretty silly to dismiss alternates before a verdict has been reached. What if a deliberating juror has a sudden heart attack, or there is a schlub who will not deliberate or vote? To me, that's two reasons why there are alternates in the first place.

This federal judge should question the schlub juror in chambers and make a determination at that point whether to declare a mistrial, or remove the non-deliberating juror (and decide whether they should be charged with contempt of court) and replace them with an alternate. Too many think the oath a juror takes is just more words with no real meaning. Making an example of the problem juror in this case would be a good thing. Jurors do not get to pick and choose what part of the juror oath they would like to follow.

244 sheik yer'mami  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:11:27am

re: #69 Iron Fist

Couldn't agree more. Besides, atheists are a rather fanatical lot and totally intolerant of religion, regardless.


The worst of the lot are commie atheists, who show all traits of totalitarian ideologues.

245 big L  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:12:43am

I think there might be a free-lancer out there that might have threatened her or her family...

246 realwest  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:12:58am

re: #240 Killgore Trout I sorta feel that way too, but if it was jury tampering, I'd expect the juror in question to actually VOTE not guilty, not just sit there and refuse to reach a verdict.
Of course, a mistrial - should one occur because of this juror - would work VERY MUCH to the benefit of the Defense. Now they've seen everything (presumably) that the prosecution has in it's case and a juror paid to refuse to vote, thereby resulting in a mistrial would be one hell of a way to "tamper" with the jury!
If I were so criminally inclined, I'd just pay the s.o.b. to vote not guilty and not take any chances with the judge!

247 big L  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:13:35am

or she could vote not guilty or not proven, what ev.

248 cygnus  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:16:14am

re: #71 Ben Hur

Next up, Athiest terror to end religion.

"Nothing is Greatest".....Boom!

That reminds of a cartoon I saw which had the caption 'Hispanic Atheists'. Two people are saying goodbye and one says to the other, 'Vaya con Nada!'

249 cosmo  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:22:02am

re: #232 Catttt

Mine, too, having been one. That's no reason to not establish new precedent, however.

This would make an interesting update of "The Juror" where the tampering isn't undertaken by the enigmatic "organized crime" but instead by jihadi interests looking to exonerate their own criminal activities.

The former idea for a Hollywood script is (c) Copyright 2007 Cosmo, L.L.C.

250 RememberSekhmet?  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:24:03am

For some people, atheism *is* a religion.

I am not talking about people who have made a serious commitment to empiricism (many of whom are lizards in good standing), and have seriously debunked the need for religion in their lives (not my cup of tea, but at least there is the recognition of the need for spiritual discipline).

I am talking about the sadly all-too-common type of atheist I would liken to a "Ron Paul" Libertarian----someone who seems blissfully unaware of the ideological and intellectual underpinnings of a movement, and when made aware would likely not agree with those foundations, but is caught up in riding a trend. Most seem to have a thing about shocking their parents.

Having not the respect for the foundations of their (un)belief, they do not seek the discipline necessary to know when one is simply discarding one irrationality for another. Having convinced themselves they are merely seeking empirical truth, they merely "baptize" their new irrationalities with the moniker of atheism.

251 Hawaiian cocoNUT  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:30:08am

That should be a case-in-study why terrorists of any stripe shouldn't be tried in civil courts!

252 Roger  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:30:56am

re: #111 littleoldlady

Should have an xxx warning on that link

253 debutaunt  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:43:21am

re: #186 commander_vimes
If the attempt was sarcasm or irony...I didn't see any / tag.

some posters dont need tags

Neither do some readers.

We don' wan' no skinkin' sarc badges.

254 Kenneth  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:46:45am

re: #246 realwest

Hey real,

I did get around to directly addressing your proposal re: Iran in the Dubai thread earlier today, if you want to read it. It is a worthwhile idea, but I do have some reservations about it...

255 Kenneth  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:50:09am

re: #238 realwest

If a mistrial is declared, will the case get a new trial or do the perps walk free?

256 Athos  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:54:03am

re: #238 realwest

Thanks for the run down. I'm a little late to the thread and was wondering the options (mistrial) and particularly if there was some recourse against the juror for this 'civil disobedience' type decision. (That was my first thought - although the more I read of the discussion, the more that tampering becomes a consideration.) Hopefully the judge will throw the book (contempt of court) at this juror and replace them as opposed to calling a mistrial.

If this is a case of 'civil disobedience' - that would seem to fit some of the things I've been hearing around LALA land from some of those prone to moonbattery - their wishes to get selected as jurors on high profile trials to just gum up the works and disrupt things. If someone was 'afraid' to be a member - they would have had plenty of time to express these fears / report the veiled (or not so veiled) threats to the Judge.

257 realwest  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:56:04am

re: #255 Kenneth Up to the US Attorney - he'd probably retry them, but the defendants would have a HUGE advantage, since presumably the US Atttorney has already played all his cards in the first trial.
This is really a new one for me - a juror who just refuses to vote!

258 Athos  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:56:07am

re: #246 realwest

If I were so criminally inclined, I'd just pay the s.o.b. to vote not guilty and not take any chances with the judge!

That's one of the reasons why I think the decision was made by the juror - either for sympathy towards the HLF or as an act of 'civil disobedience' towards the government and the war on terror.

259 Athos  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 11:57:59am

re: #258 Athos

Adding to my last - and if in sympathy to HLF, why not vote not guilty.

No, I think this is a juror looking to make a political statement against the government's case and could have misrepresented themselves from day 1 in order to sabotage the government and its crack down on organizations funding terrorism.

260 Kenneth  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 12:00:53pm

re: #258 Athos

possible reasons for refusing to vote:

1. moonbat protest against war
2. received threats
3. Muslim

261 Josephine  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 12:05:25pm

re: #170 The Other Les

re: #162 Honorary Yooper

WTF!?! You need a good seal to wear a respirator, much less a SCBA! Religious laws be damned on this one. Who does this US District judge think he is? Obviously, he's never had to be fit-tested for a SCBA.


I guess some some are going to have to learn the hard way.

My husband has to shave at night so the mask part of his CPAP machine fits properly.

I wonder who the family will sue when a bearded firefighter dies because his mask didn't fit properly? The mask manufacturer? The fire department for hiring him?

What kind of idiot would insist on doing something that will endanger his life? If his religious requirements are more important to him than his safety, he should be forced to seek employment elsewhere.

This idea of "fairness" is sinking us. Someone should tell the people who take jobs they can't do that no one promised life would be fair.

And I hope that juror who is refusing to vote is punished in some way for messing with the process.

262 Athos  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 12:21:30pm

re: #260 Kenneth

re: #258 Athos

possible reasons for refusing to vote:

1. moonbat protest against war
2. received threats
3. Muslim

Item 2 - possible. Organized crime cases would have had this as a possible event. Why just one juror and not others? If so, why not vote not guilty and hold that until a mistrial / hung jury called? I would think that the party(ies) threatening the juror would want NG as opposed to them refusing to vote.

Item 3 - also possible since we don't know anything about the juror. This raises the question - why was the juror seated and not challenged by the prosecution during the discovery / questioning process? I would think that any muslim juror would be a question mark in this type of case. If that was the case, then again, why no vote as opposed to a not guilty vote for the HLF? Because they are afraid to be the only not guilty vote? I don't think so.

Until I see more, I really do think that this juror has taken a specific position by their refusal to not vote at all. This is a position that also cries out for a contempt charge which seems rather silly for the juror to take when they could accomplish / resolve items 2 and 3 with just a not guilty vote and holding until the judge calls the jury hung. Item 1 or some variant seems most plausible to me. They are willing to risk a contempt charge in order to sabotage the process. The other question will come down to, will the judge actually cite the juror for contempt?

263 Ezekiel2517  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 2:25:49pm

re: #246 realwest

If you're only able to tamper with one or two jurors it's much harder to assure the outcome if you're only able to guarantee they will both vote not guilty.

There are much better odds in getting one juror to derail the entire process by aiming to have a mistrial declared.

Anybody know whether trials of this nature require a unanimous verdict? I thought that was only the case in capital murder trials.

264 Cousin Dave  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 2:37:07pm

#250 Sekhmet: I put atheists into three categories:

1. Atheists in principle: These are people who, after due consideration, have concluded that it is impossible that a God-like being exists. It's a conclusion that I don't agree with, but I lack the standing to say that they are wrong. Most of these atheists are people of careful and ethical principle.

2. Atheists by default: These are people who adopt a stance of atheism just because spirituality is something that they don't concern themselves with. Some of these are good people, maybe not well-thought-out, but basically good in the breach. But some of them are narcisstic to various degrees, and their stance is simply a reflection of the fact that they refuse to consider the existence of a being who is more imporant than they are. And some of these people are out-and-out sociopaths.

3. Atheists by subversion: For these peple, atheism is an extension of their basic nilhism. They see atheism as a way of tearing down civil society. Atheism is part and parcel of their moral relativism and their utter rejection of self-restraint. These are very nasty people. Most of them are moonbats to some extent or the other. In fact, I think the bulk of the Moonbat Left consists of people in this category.

265 loggiedog  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 4:16:56pm

12 Angry Men is a classic--

this situation is the different, however, because the dissenting juror is irrational. In 12 Angry Men, it took courage to convince a highly biased jury to dig down to every fact and detail. This moonbat, however is more like the last juror who is holding out for an irrational reason.

It is the dream of every Islamist to have one of their own on a jury.

266 anotherindyfilmguy  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 5:19:10pm

re: #229 kmclay

As for the Sikhs ever finding out the hard way if they worked or not against deadly chem/bio agents in a real environment I can't say. For the Iranians though; iirc the Iranians either had poor training or poor (or next to none) equipment in that conflict. Either alone is deadly, combined it's catastrophic. On the plus side (for the Iraqis) the Iranians being unable to deal with chemical attacks saved Saddam's bacon by stalling/destroying the Iranian's best offensive in the war allowing him to eject them from Iraq and eventually take that war to a stalemate.

267 Fredlike  Thu, Oct 4, 2007 7:17:13pm

re: #194 jcm

re: #162 Honorary Yooper

re: #131 NJDhockeyfan
D.C. fire department can't ban beards, federal judge rules

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has struck down a requirement that firefighters in the District of Columbia be clean-shaven.A group of firefighters who wear beards for religious reasons first sued in 2001 to challenge the fire department's "grooming policy." That policy was replaced with a safety policy in 2005 that held that beards are not compatible with breathing units because they make it impossible to form a tight seal around the face.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled that the district did not meet its burden of proof under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act to show that being clean-shaven is required to safely wear a self-contained breathing apparatus, or SCBA.

"Moreover, the Department has conceded that, for the vast majority of firefighter activity, a perfect seal between the face mask and the face is not required for safety," Robertson wrote. "The Department fully concedes that bearded firefighters have worn SCBA units for many years without incident."

Alan Etter, a spokesman for D.C. Fire and EMS, said he was not aware of the ruling but said the department would comply. However, he criticized the idea that a bearded firefighter would be safe. He said some of the plaintiffs had already left the department and those who had not were in non-firefighting roles.

"This fire department will never endanger the lives of firefighters, and this is essentially what this is doing," he said.

WTF!?! You need a good seal to wear a respirator, much less a SCBA! Religious laws be damned on this one. Who does this US District judge think he is? Obviously, he's never had to be fit-tested for a SCBA.
I had the positive pressure fail in the middle of a fire, still had air but without the seal I would have been sucking smoke. But then again when I started SCBA were for HAZMAT, house fires we just sucked smoke and hawked black loogies for a couple days afterwards.

i was required to qualify for SCBA use at a job a long time ago, It did not involve fires but other nasty things. I had a short beard and the fireman giving me the training said it would never work, it sealed just fine, i had no trouble at all. Of course with a long bead it might be tough.


This entry has been archived.
Comments are closed.

^ back to top ^

log in
Name:
Pass:

Register Forgot Your Password? My Account Re-send Confirmation (To log in, cookies must be enabled in your browser!)

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► LGF Hits

► Slideshows

► Resources

► Never Forget

► Statistics

► Tag Cloud

► Contact

You must have Javascript enabled to use the contact form.
Your email:

Subject:

Message:


Messages may be published in our weblog, unless you request otherwise.
Tech Note:
Using the Contact Form

► News/Opinion

Free shipping on all new textbooks.  Plus, save up to 30%.
More Partners

Compare Electricity Prices in your area. Texas Electricity is deregulated; you have the right to choose Texas Electric Rates from among many Texas Electric Companies.

Left wing neo-con philosemitic fascist hedonists.


Finish Line- $10 off $60- 728 x 90